[2002] KEHC 1094 (KLR)
The court found that the deceased was fatally knocked down by an ambulance owned by the Ministry of Health. The defendant was held vicariously liable for the actions of its driver, as there was no evidence that the driver was not on official duty or that reasonable care was exercised. The court rejected the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 1094 (KLR)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Monicah Gakenye Waweru (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Peter Kanyoko Waweru); Defendant: The Hon. The Attorney General
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Suit 2028 of 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the plaintiff
- Legal Topics
- Fatal Accidents, Vicarious Liability, Road Traffic Accidents
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Monicah Gakenye Waweru (Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of Peter Kanyoko Waweru)
Plaintiff
The Hon. The Attorney General
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant is vicariously liable for the fatal accident caused by the ambulance driver.
- 2 Whether the suit is time barred and if late filing is excusable.
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages under the Law Reform Act and/or the Fatal Accidents Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the deceased was fatally knocked down by an ambulance owned by the Ministry of Health. The defendant was held vicariously liable for the actions of its driver, as there was no evidence that the driver was not on official duty or that reasonable care was exercised. The court rejected the defendant's limitation argument, accepting the plaintiff's explanation for late filing due to age and ill health. On quantum, the court awarded Ksh.70,000 for loss of expectation of life under the Law Reform Act, finding no basis for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act due to lack of proof of income and no award for pain and suffering as death was instantaneous. Judgment was entered...
Court Disposition
judgment for the plaintiff
Orders
- Judgment entered for the plaintiff for Ksh.70,000 for loss of expectation of life under the Law Reform Act.
- No award under the Fatal Accidents Act.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
37 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CIVIL SUIT NO.2028 OF 1999
MONICAH GAKENYE WAWERU(Suing as the Administrator of the Estate of
PETER KANYOKO WAWERU ) …………………………. PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
THE HON. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ………….. DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
On the 6. 3.96, the deceased herein was along the Thika- Muranga road. Pw2 an eye witness was also along that road. A motor vehicle ambulance owned by the Ministry of Health Muranga District came at such a high speed that it knocked down the deceased Peter Kanyoko Waweru who died instantly. The crowed wanted to beat up the driver but was restrained when the driver explained that an ambulance is permitted to travel at a high speed.
The deceased mother, Monicah Gakenye Waweru aged 75 years or thereabout filed suit as the administratix to the said estate. She prayed for damages under the Law Reform Act and the Fatal Accidents Act.
The state called no evidence but submitted that this suit was time barred.
A) LIABILITY
There is sufficient evidence to show that the deceased was knocked by a vehicle that was an ambulance. The defendants required to show that they had authority at that particular time to travel at more than the high speed given, namely, was the driver of the ambulance on official duty?.
Regardless of this, if he is permitted to travel at a high speed, he must in all circumstances take reasonable and due care to the said public on the road and other users.
I would find the defendants vicariously liable at 100%.
B) QUANTUM
The deceased died instantly I find that an award for pain and suffering would not be awarded. I would though award Ksh.70,000/- for loss of expectation of life under the Law Reform Act being the conventional figure or sum given by these courts. I find the plaintiff holds letters of administration. I will not award any damages under the Fatal Accidents Act as there has been no proof that the deceased earned any income.
C) JURISIDCITON
The state says this suit is time barred. The suit was filed out of time. Patel J 1. 10. 99 granted these orders.
The plaintiff said she was old and ailing and is the reason why she filed the suit late.
I would accept this explanation.
I hereby would find that the suit is properly filed I accordingly enter judgment for the plaintiff
In Summary
1) Running down action
2) Pedestrian/motor vehicle ambulance accident
3) Male adult aged 48 years old in 1996
4) Injuries: Fatal
5) Liability 100%
6) Quantum: General Damages
A) Law Reform Act
i. Pain and suffering – Nil
ii. Loss of expectation of life Ksh.70,000/- B) Fatal Accidents Act – Nil
7) Jurisdiction: Late filing explained and Accepted. __________ Total Ksh.70,000/-
I award costs of this suit to the plaintiff. I award interest on General Damages from the date of this suit.
Dated this 6th day of February, 2002 at Nairobi.
M.A. ANG’AWA
JUDGE